Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

Since negligence is duty - breach - causation and damages, let's create a statutory duty that a parent should vaccinate their children if possible.

RexTalionis:My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

Brilliant! But can't you file suit over that already? Granted you need the preponderance of evidence first...

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

My solution is this: Quarantine. You can do whatever you like with your kid, just don't expect to be able to go into any public place. And enjoy homeschooling.

There is a small measles outbreak where I am. Some high school kids may have been exposed. As a precaution, almost 100 students aren't able to return to class. While most are able to get their work done remotely, some may have their high school year extended to accommodate the lost time.

Sucks to be them, but it was easily solvable with a needle in their childhood.

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

I don't think we'd need to get lawyers involved. Just remove the religious exemption from the vaccination mandate to have you kid attend a public school. Or at least strengthen it to the point where it has to be an established belief of not only yourself but your church/congregation/coven/scientology center.

If the choice is having to homeschool or exposing their kid to autism, most parents would choose the autism.

They are biological hazards, and you round them up like yellow people after pearl harbor and put them in camps and vax them and when the vax sets in then you can let them go.If they miss work or something, fark them. Don't give them a felony, just make them sit through education seminars, like they do with drunks they catch. It's for public safety, just lie with drunks.I can't be driving around endangering everyone with a car.And no one else should be walking around airports, and public places harboring poxes.Fark 'em.

Whooping Cough where I am. And I can tell my Doc was surprised by the shocked expression on my face when she dropped that bomb shell. I thought she was kidding. Nope. (Of course I got a booster...)

I just can't believe it. I really can't. The entire anti-vaxx thing is like some special kind of stupid.

But to inflict whooping cough on a little kid... man, you're now entering the realm of simply being evil.

I understand the fear of having to take care of an autistic child. Being responsible for a kid with special needs is incredibly hard work. When you're off the clock, you're not really off the clock. When you're on the clock, virtually all of your energy and attention is devoted to them.

That life is many magnitudes better than the life of a parent with a kid who died from a disease we learned how to prevent decades ago.

RexTalionis:My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

What a thoroughly horrible idea. Your suggestion is that some children have to die in order to teach retards a lesson. Why should any child have to suffer in the first place at the hands on another set of parents? We require obligatory school attendance (or a legally sanctioned alternative). We can certainlly legally require all children to get vaccinated.

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

The first kid they don't vaccinate:1. Take the kid.2. Sterilize both parents.3. Post a warning about them in their community as "dangerous disease carriers"(even if their parents were smart and got them vaccinated, they probably skipped their boosters)

Anti-vax arguments seem to come to "I don't agree to it because it MIGHT harm my child" - and no math/ratio information will sway that inherent drive to protect newbies.

Maybe something other than "you are shiat-flinging stupid"?

Maybe we need to mimic the ceremonies other societies used to mark an infants' passages - to wit? "Yes, it is scary, yes, babby might die....however? if babby lives, there is your proof God has blessed your house and we welcome this strong new life into the communal fold. if you opt not to participate babby cannot join the tribe and must be outcast as weak." There are thousands of years of just this participation-by=pressure to draw on.

I sat up after every "puppy-shot" visit my kid had, fearful - but the idea of NOT vaxxing wasn't even on the radar......nice to think I may have to booster to protect myself from two-legged petri dishes who apparently are too delicate to risk after surviving the crap shoot that is "two joined cells and through the canal into lights and oxygen" - no mean feat, btw, and a pretty fair first guide into "ready to join the world with my peers".

It isn't stupidity, it is selfishness - and it will doom us all - you'd think bible-centric folk would get that - that and the communal celebration of potentially dangerous rites of passage completed.....but, no....that is too simple.

I have a cousin who is anti-vaxxer. She is a lovely, caring, positive person, and she is not stupid. She is just really, really wrong about this. And there is no reason that will reach her about this topic - it ties too deeply to paranoia undergrid with a real, reasonable concern about shady business practices and bought-and-paid-for research.

I don't think we will ever change the mind of someone who is anti-vax. It's not worth it to even"gently broach this subject." Prudie is just wrong about that. But it is important to talk about it with others, and it is really important to disagree with her if she brings it up when others are present. We do not need new anti-vaxxers.

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

I have a better solution: vaccinations are absolutely required in all cases where they don't pose a clear and demonstrable threat to health (ie: allergies, immunocompromised). If a parent refuses to vaccinate their kid, the child will become a temporary ward of the state, receive their vaccinations, and be returned to their parents.

RexTalionis:Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

Meh non-vaccinated children should be forced into isolation from the rest of society. Make them go live on an island somewhere, like Rikers Island.

DeaH:I have a cousin who is anti-vaxxer. She is a lovely, caring, positive person, and she is not stupid. She is just really, really wrong about this. And there is no reason that will reach her about this topic - it ties too deeply to paranoia undergrid with a real, reasonable concern about shady business practices and bought-and-paid-for research.

I don't think we will ever change the mind of someone who is anti-vax. It's not worth it to even"gently broach this subject." Prudie is just wrong about that. But it is important to talk about it with others, and it is really important to disagree with her if she brings it up when others are present. We do not need new anti-vaxxers.

Willful ignorance is another word for stupidity. Your cousin is stupid.

DeaH:I have a cousin who is anti-vaxxer. She is a lovely, caring, positive person, and she is not stupid. She is just really, really wrong about this. And there is no reason that will reach her about this topic - it ties too deeply to paranoia undergrid with a real, reasonable concern about shady business practices and bought-and-paid-for research.

I don't think we will ever change the mind of someone who is anti-vax. It's not worth it to even"gently broach this subject." Prudie is just wrong about that. But it is important to talk about it with others, and it is really important to disagree with her if she brings it up when others are present. We do not need new anti-vaxxers.

whidbey:I don't know about anti-vaxxers, but the anti-anti-vaxxers are kind of assholes. So that tells me something right away.

It tells me that some people are damn sick and tired of people endangering their own kids and other people's kids because of some long-discredited fraudulent medical claims, and don't see any remaining value in trying to be polite about it. Given the level of obstinate stupidity involved in the anti-vax viewpoint, it's reasonable to conclude that shaming is a viable way to attack the problem.

Karac:RexTalionis: Whenever we have the antivaccination threads, there are always those who pop up and talk about how it's the parent's right to be able to raise their children in whatever manner necessary.

My solution is this: Allow parents to not vaccinate their children, but should it be shown that their unvaccinated children caused another child or person to become ill by a preponderance of the evidence, those parents should be liable for all damages necessary to cover the cost of treating the child or person or for wrongful death of that child or person (should it get to that point).

We'll see how many anti-vaccination proponents there are once they get slapped a few times with thousands of dollars in damages from other families.

I don't think we'd need to get lawyers involved. Just remove the religious exemption from the vaccination mandate to have you kid attend a public school. Or at least strengthen it to the point where it has to be an established belief of not only yourself but your church/congregation/coven/scientology center.

If the choice is having to homeschool or exposing their kid to autism, most parents would choose the autism.

The wording of religious exemption is ridiculous to begin with; It breaks down to "you believe your kid was given enough of an immune system by god, and that to vaccinate would be an affront to your faith by challenging your god's work as incomplete"... So the moment anyone w/a religious vaccination puts a bandaid on their kid, aren't they saying god didn't give their kid good enough clotting agents? Or to specifically address anti-vaxxers' claim to a right to send their kids to public schools - wouldn't they believe god created their kids with enough information already in their brains, that to educate their kids would be an affront to god's work as incomplete?

I understand the fear of having to take care of an autistic child. Being responsible for a kid with special needs is incredibly hard work. When you're off the clock, you're not really off the clock. When you're on the clock, virtually all of your energy and attention is devoted to them.